JB/051/379/004: Difference between revisions

Transcribe Bentham: A Collaborative Initiative

From Transcribe Bentham: Transcription Desk

Find a new page on our Untranscribed Manuscripts list.

JB/051/379/004: Difference between revisions

BenthamBot (talk | contribs)
Auto loaded
 
Jancopes (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Line 3: Line 3:
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE -->
<!-- ENTER TRANSCRIPTION BELOW THIS LINE -->


''This Page Has Not Been Transcribed Yet''
<head>Judges Numbers Judicial Estab.</head><lb/>just merely because it was the decision of the<lb/>House of Commons, till the House grew ashamed of<lb/>it and reversed it of themselves. <del>In the same country</del><lb/><del>there are doubtless</del> <add>How</add> many, who now that the House<lb/>of Lords have decided that <del>on an</del> <del><add>a <gap/></add></del> <del>Impeachment be-</del><lb/><add><del>there</del> in a cause of three years length<hi rend="superscript">+</hi>,</add> <note><hi rend="superscript">+</hi>twenty different<lb/>transactions <add>of different nations</add> carried on<lb/>between different persons<lb/>in different places and<lb/>at different times are<lb/>further rules of perspi-<lb/>-casity</note><lb/><del>-fore the histories of ten crimes or pretended crimes</del><lb/><del>are in order to enable them to see their way to</del><lb/><del>better through a long cause</del> to be jumbled into<lb/>one, <del>will be <gap/></del> are satisfied that it is a right<lb/>one because it is the decision of the House of<lb/>Lords: <del>and the decision of the twelve Judges</del><lb/><del>would carry many an absurdity through the pub-</del><lb/><del>-lic with a facility which would not be experienced</del><lb/><del>experienced by the decision of a single Court or</del><lb/><del>a single Judge.</del> This in the preceding page.<lb/><note>With <add>From</add> these same<lb/>persons de-<lb/>The <del><gap/></del> single opi-<lb/>-cision<lb/>-nion of a Chancellor<lb/>without effect could it<lb/>be supposed that a<lb/>if a Chancellor<lb/>standing single would<lb/><del><gap/></del> <add>have</add> thought proper<lb/>to give such as<lb/>one would <add>could</add> not be<lb/>expected to have<lb/><del>equal weight</del> <add><del>with them</del></add> <del>to</del><lb/>meet with equal de-<lb/>-ference.</note><lb/><lb/>Numbers then assist a Judge in overbearing<lb/>the authority of public opinion. A single Judge<lb/><add>finds</add> has no force to oppose to that authority but<lb/>his own. He <add>puts a watch upon himself</add> becomes cautious in consequence.<lb/>And Others <del>however</del> may still think that if the first object<lb/>had been to screen guilt from punishment altogether, and<lb/>the second to substitute to the punishments due to twenty<lb/>crimes the punishment due to one, by confounding all<lb/><add>impressions <del>marks</del> left by</add> <del>the traces of <gap/></del> and leaving it impossible to the most<lb/>athletic memory to hold <add>grasp</add> any story beyond the last a more<lb/>promising expedient could not have been devised.





Revision as of 18:06, 11 September 2013

Click Here To Edit

Judges Numbers Judicial Estab.
just merely because it was the decision of the
House of Commons, till the House grew ashamed of
it and reversed it of themselves. In the same country
there are doubtless How many, who now that the House
of Lords have decided that on an a Impeachment be-
there in a cause of three years length+, +twenty different
transactions of different nations carried on
between different persons
in different places and
at different times are
further rules of perspi-
-casity

-fore the histories of ten crimes or pretended crimes
are in order to enable them to see their way to
better through a long cause to be jumbled into
one, will be are satisfied that it is a right
one because it is the decision of the House of
Lords: and the decision of the twelve Judges
would carry many an absurdity through the pub-
-lic with a facility which would not be experienced
experienced by the decision of a single Court or
a single Judge. This in the preceding page.
With From these same
persons de-
The single opi-
-cision
-nion of a Chancellor
without effect could it
be supposed that a
if a Chancellor
standing single would
have thought proper
to give such as
one would could not be
expected to have
equal weight with them to
meet with equal de-
-ference.


Numbers then assist a Judge in overbearing
the authority of public opinion. A single Judge
finds has no force to oppose to that authority but
his own. He puts a watch upon himself becomes cautious in consequence.
And Others however may still think that if the first object
had been to screen guilt from punishment altogether, and
the second to substitute to the punishments due to twenty
crimes the punishment due to one, by confounding all
impressions marks left by the traces of and leaving it impossible to the most
athletic memory to hold grasp any story beyond the last a more
promising expedient could not have been devised.




Identifier: | JB/051/379/004"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 51.

Date_1

Marginal Summary Numbering

6-8

Box

051

Main Headings

evidence; procedure code

Folio number

379

Info in main headings field

judicial establishment judges number

Image

004

Titles

Category

text sheet

Number of Pages

4

Recto/Verso

recto

Page Numbering

f7* / f8* / f9 / f10

Penner

jeremy bentham

Watermarks

[[watermarks::l munn [britannia with shield emblem]]]

Marginals

jeremy bentham

Paper Producer

benjamin constant

Corrections

Paper Produced in Year

Notes public

ID Number

16544

Box Contents

UCL Home » Transcribe Bentham » Transcription Desk
  • Create account
  • Log in